9 11 The Whole World Knows Even The French Get It ( 1) (9/11 TRUTH SERIES)

Here is a link to one of Mylène Farmer's videos. I'm not embedding it because it is a little racy, but it might encourage people to look into
French pop which has some great material. She's described as a combination of Madonna and Kate Bush. I just use the word yummy myself.

i haven't read the thread properly so in case it has already been mentionned, apologize.

i am french, leaving abroad but in france since a few month now.

let me tell you that, and sorry if it does disappoint your early conclusions about this country:

french people don't have a clue about 911 lies.

this comic has been ridiculed all over the media for its statements. he was also obliged by sarkozy himself to apologize publicly for this,

and anyone who attempts to say something about 911 get the same treatment.

the situation of the french media is overly dramatic as they all belong to weapon sellers (dassault, lagardere mainly), they don't have any editorial
independence whatsoever. their content is full of propaganda everyday stigmatizing on whoever would ask question about 911 (sectarism, insanity,
personal attacks ect)

the truth about the lies is indeed further away to be revealed in france than it is in the us.

since i'm here, in france, i've been talking about it to many people that pretends to be leftist, informed and aware about politics and social
injustice.

for the vast majority of them (i'd say 90 to 95%) i'm a lunatic that has lost grip with reality and their common answer is, when i ask them to see
and look for themselves and stop trusting mass media, "i let the seeking the truth job to journalists as they do it better than me". then they try
to change discussion topic if they don't get simply too much angry with me, physically running away (i've lost many friends lately i believe because
of those discussions, not joking).

so frustratring and terrifying about their condition, i confess i kind of gave up trying to make them aware because otherwise nobody will talk to me
anymore; hopefully they'll wake up though... how and when i'm not too sure...

I'm totally with you on Alizée. I have never seen a cuter little lady in my life. She came straight down on the bullet train from heaven. Yikes!

Strangely enough, I got turned on to her because her song "Contre Courant", was used as the sound track on a short video by a photographer from (of
all places) Texas. That started a progression that led, via "Ella Elle L'a!" to France Gall, Serge Gainsbourg, Françoise Hardy, Michel Berger,
Vanessa Paradis (Johnny Depp's wife), Miréille (Mimi) Mathieu and . . . I just keep on digging and loving it.

I could link to a lot of great ones but here is (great genius, sadly passed away, also France Gall's husband) Michel Berger's "Paradis Blanc":

(This one demands to be embedded, just to show people what beauty comes from France.)

To Mika:

Do you know how the story of that professor from the École de Guerre turned out? The one who was dismissed for writing a book questioning the
American government's story about 9/11.

The above states basically that the professor was fired from his position at le Collège interarmées de défense (CID) which, I gather is the
French equivalent to something like West Point, but maybe snootier, for publishing an article based on ideas developed in a book which support the
notion that the 9/11 attack was an American/Israeli joint venture.

Here's a link to the thread from which the quotes are taken. It's a one page thread, easy reading.

Thank you ipsedixit !
I will try to keep it short because we are off topic.

Yes, Swampfox should elaborate. In the link you provided, nowhere it says French officials took part in the document forgery.
One interesting source from the wiki page : French
probe led to 'fake Niger uranium papers'
Martino was allegedly working for the British, French and Italian intelligence services. All 3 have indicated they could not authentify the documents.
The only ones accused at one point to have forged the papers are the Italians.
Another useful link : Interview with Rocco Martino
I will add some sources believe Martino was working for Italy to spy on the French.
We will never know the truth, too many services are involved in a complicated story of intelligence/counter-intelligence/disinfo.

To me, it is clear Cheney knew this "proof" was forged but wanted to use it anyway, it was too good to go to garbage.

When you look at things, don't forget other countries perspective and own muddling with each other, it's something that is repeatedly
underestimated. Without it, you can't get the full picture.

Legally and morally, Mylène is not yours. She's a human being standing by herself and she can go with whoever she wants. And you may never catch her

Chauprade was reintegrated. He has received huge support because he has a very high reputation and expertise.
He was not actually questionning 9/11 in his book but only taking in account that the belief 9/11 was an inside job was a puzzle part of nowadays
geopolitics. But it was already going too far...
From what I have read from him, I believe he thinks it's an inside job but it's only my guess.

Originally posted by Manouche
Martino was allegedly working for the British, French and Italian intelligence services. All 3 have indicated they could not authentify the documents.
The only ones accused at one point to have forged the papers are the Italians.

I haven't really looked into this story in a serious way, so I accept what you are saying. It amazes me how much currency these papers had when
everyone seems to have realized that they were fake.

I might point out though, that the difference between a counterfeiter and one who passes counterfeit money is only a few classes at a technical
college.

We will never know the truth, too many services are involved in a complicated story of intelligence/counter-intelligence/disinfo.

This is very likely true.

To me, it is clear Cheney knew this "proof" was forged but wanted to use it anyway, it was too good to go to garbage.

I agree. Cheney is a very, very bad man.

When you look at things, don't forget other countries perspective and own muddling with each other, it's something that is repeatedly
underestimated. Without it, you can't get the full picture.

Originally posted by ::.mika.::
i haven't read the thread properly so in case it has already been mentionned, apologize.

i am french, leaving abroad but in france since a few month now.

let me tell you that, and sorry if it does disappoint your early conclusions about this country:

french people don't have a clue about 911 lies.

this comic has been ridiculed all over the media for its statements. he was also obliged by sarkozy himself to apologize publicly for this,

and anyone who attempts to say something about 911 get the same treatment.

the situation of the french media is overly dramatic as they all belong to weapon sellers (dassault, lagardere mainly), they don't have any editorial
independence whatsoever. their content is full of propaganda everyday stigmatizing on whoever would ask question about 911 (sectarism, insanity,
personal attacks ect)

the truth about the lies is indeed further away to be revealed in france than it is in the us.

since i'm here, in france, i've been talking about it to many people that pretends to be leftist, informed and aware about politics and social
injustice.

for the vast majority of them (i'd say 90 to 95%) i'm a lunatic that has lost grip with reality and their common answer is, when i ask them to see
and look for themselves and stop trusting mass media, "i let the seeking the truth job to journalists as they do it better than me". then they try
to change discussion topic if they don't get simply too much angry with me, physically running away (i've lost many friends lately i believe because
of those discussions, not joking).

so frustratring and terrifying about their condition, i confess i kind of gave up trying to make them aware because otherwise nobody will talk to me
anymore; hopefully they'll wake up though... how and when i'm not too sure...

[edit on 3-8-2009 by ::.mika.::]

Bonsoir Mika, merci beacoup pour ca.

Please keep trying. I know it is hard. I keep trying with the French side of my family, but they think I am insane too.

They just put their fingers in their ears.

Too bad the media conditioning works so well in France. Maybe it is time for a media revolution. Vive La France et Vive La Presse Libre!

Originally posted by Militant1
Steel doesn't melt when over stressed it snaps, bends, twist, ect. in order for it to melt it would have to be trapped between two meduims stronger
than itself. The pressure would have been enough to melt steel except before that happend the steel would have reached its stress point and failed,
there by releasing the said pressure. Of note you might want to link those studies if you can, and its also noteworthy that this melting steel wasn't
noticed in any other buildings that collasped, before 9/11.

Thanks for elaborating, I didn't intend what I said to be anywhere near a complete analysis.

I'm not trying to win the truthers argument for them, i am an engineer and niether me nor my coworkers have been able to figure out how those
towers collasped the way they did. Its not just us but many in the field dare not speak the truth, theres alot more to this than we know. I am sorry
to say the overall mechanics is wrong. Its doesn't work on paper and computer models will not recreate it as it happend.

If that is the case it is difficult for anyone to accept that, unless these computer simulations are debunked sufficiently.

Originally posted by john124
I go with the facts and evidence, which has been explained sufficiently many years ago.

You are supporting "facts" that are contradictory to observable science.

Originally posted by john124
I accept the evidence

You should not accept evidence...you should analyze it.

OK, rather I accepted proof, or what appeared to be proof from a number of compotent engineers and scientists. I have not yet seen anybody explain
what was incorrect with the computer models in any kind of sufficient detail to make me think these are wrong. I may have assumed certain evidence
had already been analysed correctly, as there has been no logical debunking attempted or at least demonstrated yet.

Instead of believing...use critical thinking and understand.

I wouldn't call it believing, I would call it more of a trust in certain scientists that they know how to do their job. From my point of view, these
models appear to be accurate. There is no way that anybody can rigorously analyse every single piece of evidence that science has to offer, there
just isn't enough time for that. Peer-review can do that, and I would accept peer-reviewed data.

By understanding these models to a reasonable degree using critical thinking I can only determine that they are accurate, unless they can be
adequately debunked. That may be possible, but I'm still waiting for that to happen.

Unfortunatly the french people are still asleep concerning 9/11. The youth does realise something is wrong because they surf on the internet. The
adults lives in their cocoon.
I have also family over there, myself I am Belgian. Don't ask.
I do found it hard to convince people so I stopped trying. But I do give them free choice. I show them when a plain is spreading his poison in the
air (chemtrails) and ask them what will happen (I did not mentioned poison or chemtrails) . They say it will disapear, after a couple of minutes they
notice that it does not dissapear. Then they ask me questions. Do not give them the info in the hand but give them a free choice and respect their
choice.

Never impose your beliefs like some famous persons now are doing. One thing you may never doubt about, everybody will know the truth when the
time's right. Do not doubt. Share your joy and love, not fear ! Focus on positive things, not the bad things !

A thing I must tell, someone mentioned "french fries" in the beginning of this thread. To french : to cut into slivers or thin strips before
cooking, to prepare for cooking by slicing it into strips and pounding etc...
Many people believes that it comes from France but it does not. Belgium is the origin. Not the patato, but the fries that derives from it.
On Wikipedia you will find other explanations, including the Belgian one. One fact is that it is not from France. In belgium you have also french
speaking people and flamisch speaking people.
There is also a confusion about the grammar, some are writing "franch" and sothers "french". You figure it out !

And because some are embedding a musicvideo, I will do the same if I may. It's a boy from Quebec that started at the age of 7 in a childrens program,
at 8 he sang with Celine Dion life (he was very sick at that time, you can hear this when he singing low... the poor boy), at 9 he had his first full
album available in the stores.
His name : Francis Bernier
If the video does not appear : www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by john124
I have not yet seen anybody explain what was incorrect with the computer models in any kind of sufficient detail to make me think these are wrong.

The explanations are all around you...

The problem with that, is that they AREN'T!!!

Originally posted by john124
I may have assumed certain evidence had already been analysed correctly

Originally posted by john124
I would call it more of a trust in certain scientists that they know how to do their job.

Stop assuming you can trust the government and analyze the evidence yourself...

I said I put trust in Science, not the government. So please stop with your silliness and read what I put.

The only thing standing between you and the truth is preconceived notions and a lack of effort...

Excuse me.... I do actually have better things to do than analyse something which appears to be adequately explained already. I'm not an engineer,
and people who claim to be engineers are saying that the WTC steel could not have melted due to the collapse. It's funny how those who claim to be
engineers don't think they need to provide adequate evidence to support their assumptions.

Are you an engineer??? If not then why do you think you can do the job of an engineer/scientist better than engineers/scientists??? Surely you could
be mistaken due to a lack of scientific or mathematical knowledge!?

If you are an engineer.... then please provide adequate proof of govt lies or the specifics of what you believe, such as the steel not melting during
collapse etc? And by adequate I mean proof that contains correct rigorous scientific procedures, without a basis in conjecture.

What "you" seem to call adequate evidence, I call conjecture - because that's all we've had on this thread, and it's unmistakenly conjecture. I
have a degree level education in a scientific field, so it's pretty easy to understand what is considered proof, and what is conjecture. That also
allows me to understand the various reports to enough of a level to understand what is correct and incorrect, even if I don't have the full
expertise. Therefore I can see what is blatent rubbish in "truthers" reports, and what makes absolute sense in the govt. reports.

And what you ignore is overwhelming evidence which is considered to be proof from many engineers and scientists that support the govt. findings.

Proof is more than a bunch of opinions and I'm still waiting for those skeptical engineers to come forward with an actual report that makes sense.
And I don't mean those people on here that claim to be engineers and then piss off never to return with their so-called evidence, or those who link
to a website with no credibility or just show a complete lack of scientific knowledge.

Next time actually read what I typed, and don't reply with this pathetic arrogance when somebody is giving you a perfectly logical reason why they
feel the govt. answers related to the WTC collapsing makes much more sense than any other discussed outcomes. As it just makes you look completely
ignorant.

And don't assume somebody is ignorant because they haven't done their own actual research individually. Have you???!!!!! Have most people?!!!!
Probably not!!!! And by research I don't mean thinking about it and deciding based on feelings, emotions & gut feelings!!! And I don't mean a
limited opinionated analysis leaving a conclusion based on conjecture.

Peer-reviewed science is there for properly done research to be assessed..... and there is not one single engineer or scientist in the world who
understands every single field to a complete extent. So it's unlikely you can tell me anymore than those particular experts have already said,
unless you are one yourself.

But it's highly unlikely you would have to try and convince me using conjecture on ATS, you would produce a valuable report instead. And that's
what we are all waiting for in order to see adequate proof that debunks the govt. view.

Do you not put trust in science when you eat your dinner, brush your teeth, wash your hair etc! You put trust in those who designed those products -
that they are fit to consume and use!!!

The same applies to the many engineers who have analysed the WTC collapse and agree that steel would have melted during the collapse.

I'm not going to claim all engineers agree, but those that don't have not adequately provided a counter-argument that goes beyond "we know it
couldn't have happened" or just wild conjecture & speculation.

And taking parts of my posts out of context and trying to make it look like I blindly followed the govt. without using any form of critical thinking
first is completely shallow, and is becoming more common by those people who are blind deniers of anything the govt. says, however obviously truthful
it is. And the same goes for most believers, rather than prove their beliefs, they would bash the dis-believers in a most illogical fashion.

Some Americans would still cry out their govt was lying, even if they said aliens exist and 9/11 was an inside job. They would probably start
claiming something else was also true, and they'd never be happy. IMO I think it's some form of psychosis that the modern man can inherit from a
lack of critical thinking and paranoia.

My question is, don't people realise that steel does not need to melt to weaken? It's a progressive thing, the more you heat up steel the less it
can structurally hold. Add to that the fact that the still existing parts would be holding up what the broken parts could not you have an recipe for
what happend.

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to
an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by
addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim.

The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.